← Library
Madras High CourtWP(MD)/4995/2025disposed of

C.Radhakrishnan v. The Superintendent Of Police

2025-02-25Honourable Mr. Justice P.Dhanabal6 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 25.02.2025 CORAM :

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.DHANABAL C.Radhakrishnan ... Petitioner Vs

1. The Superintendent of Police, Virudhunagar District.

2. The Inspector of Police, Aruppukottai Taluk Station, Virudhunagar District.

3. The Sub Registrar, O/o.Sub Registrar, Aruppukottai, Virudhunagar District.

4. Purushothamadassgupta

5. Vivekanandhan

6. Sheik Abdullah

7. K.Nagarajan

8. Thangaraj

9. Ganesan 1/6

10. Mahesh

11. Krishnakumar @ Pulla Poosa

12. E.Thiruvengadam @ Ellaiyar ... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondent no.1 and 2 herein to conduct enquiry and take appropriate action against the respondent no.3 to 12 upon the petitioners complaint dated 25.01.2025 within a stipulated time period in accordance with law. For Petitioner : Mr.M.Kamesh For R1 and R2 : Mr.R.M.Anbunithi (R1,R2) Additional Public Prosecutor For R3 : Mr.M.Senthil Ayyanar (R3) Government Advocate

O R D E R

This Writ Petition has been filed directing the respondents No.1 and 2 to conduct enquiry and take appropriate action against the respondent Nos.3 to 12 based on the petitioner's complaint dated 25.01.2025.

2.Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials available on record.

2/6

3.According to the petitioner, he lodged a complaint before the 2nd respondent to conduct enquiry and take appropriate action against the respondent Nos.3 to 12 and the same was not considered. Hence, this petition has been filed.

4.The learned Government Advocate appearing for the 3rd respondent would submit that the 3rd respondent, who is a Sub Registrar was unnecessarily added as a respondent. He was acted only on his official capacity and he registered the documents after following the due procedure. The alleged date of registration was in the year 2006. However, the petitioner has filed a complaint against the private respondents, including the 3rd respondent.

5.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents 1 and 2 would submit that they have received the complaint of the petitioner, dated 25.01.2025 and the same is pending for enquiry.

6.At this juncture, the learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that if the 3rd respondent was acted in his official capacity 3/6

and he has no intention to commit any offence as alleged by the petitioner, the respondent police can decide the same during enquiry. 7.Considering the limited scope of the prayer sought for in the writ petition, this Court hereby direct the 2nd respondent to conduct enquiry and dispose of the petitioner's complaint, dated 25.01.2025, on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of one week from the date of this order.

8.With the aforesaid directions and observations, this Writ Petition stands disposed of.

25.02.2025 Internet :Yes Index :Yes/No NCC :Yes/No Note : Issue order copy on 26.02.2025 PNM 4/6

To

1. The Superintendent of Police, Virudhunagar District.

2. The Inspector of Police, Aruppukottai Taluk Station, Virudhunagar District.

3. The Sub Registrar, O/o.Sub Registrar, Aruppukottai, Virudhunagar District.

4.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

5/6

P.DHANABAL , J.

PNM 25.02.2025 6/6